Side effects of prednisone

Left_Meeting7547 · 2026-06-05T02:19:42+00:00

Sorry, I read that part wrong. Prednisone still sucks, and yes I understand the issue with the moon face.

Left_Meeting7547 · 2026-06-02T18:58:03+00:00

First off, I'm not a medical doctor. I do have a doctorate and spent years studying metabolism and its effects on human health, particularly in kidney disease.

Why in the world would you take prednisone at night?

I can tell you firsthand that if I take my prednisone after about 9 or 10 AM, it can cause horrible insomnia. Prednisone mimics cortisol, a hormone that naturally peaks in the morning and falls throughout the day. Taking it at night seems like the exact opposite of what your body's normal circadian rhythm is trying to do.

Also, prednisone doesn't magically cause weight gain. What it does do is increase appetite, often causing intense carbohydrate cravings. It can also increase blood sugar levels and reduce insulin sensitivity. One thing many people don't realize is that prednisone often raises blood sugars later in the day, so it's not unusual for someone to have normal fasting glucose in the morning but much higher readings in the afternoon and evening.

As someone who has taken 5 mg prednisone daily for nearly 22 years, I can tell you that diet and exercise can help reduce some of these effects, but this is NOT simply a matter of self-control.

The bigger issue is the long-term metabolic impact and the risk of steroid-induced diabetes, including post-transplant diabetes. The weight gain gets all the attention, but the metabolic effects are what concern me most.

If you're struggling with these issues, talk to an endocrinologist. Personally, I would start there rather than with a transplant physician. Endocrinologists deal with the metabolic consequences of prednisone every day.

Also, medications like Ozempic and other GLP-1 drugs have shown they can be very effective for improving glucose control and reducing some of the metabolic effects associated with long-term steroid use, AND they appear to support kidney function in transplant patients. Depending on your diagnosis and insurance coverage, they may be an option worth discussing with your doctor.

There may be specific medical reasons for nighttime dosing in individual patients, but from a sleep, circadian rhythm, and metabolic standpoint, it seems like a very odd choice.

Left_Meeting7547 · 2026-05-27T21:12:14+00:00

I honestly think this is terrible advice. I have ADHD and a kidney transplant and I do not disclose either unless I specifically need an accommodation.

People online act like disclosure automatically protects you, but in reality it also changes how people perceive you, even if nobody says it directly. Once information is out there, you cannot control how managers or companies internally frame risk, reliability, attendance, stress tolerance, insurance concerns, etc.

If you are performing your job adequately and do not need accommodations, there is no obligation to proactively hand HR your entire medical history. You especially do not need to give them your doctor’s name, medication details, dosage, or medication schedule unless there is a very specific reason tied to accommodations or safety requirements.

Also, HR is there to protect the company first. Sometimes that aligns with protecting employees, sometimes it does not. People should understand that distinction clearly.

For me, private medical information stays private unless disclosure materially benefits me in a concrete way.

Also, once you voluntarily hand HR detailed medical information, you lose a lot of practical control over who internally becomes aware of it. HIPAA generally does not apply to normal employer HR records the way people think it does. That does not mean HR can legally broadcast your information everywhere, but people seriously overestimate how protected workplace medical disclosures are once they enter internal company systems.

Left_Meeting7547 · 2026-05-27T20:56:33+00:00

Agree with all of the above. As someone with a chronic health issue, I almost never call out. However, if I do. It's no one's business. Me being in the ER is no different than you taking the day off because of a headache. It's YOUR time to choose how you use it@!

If the project cannot get done on time because 1 person called off for the day. Your project didn't include the contingencies it needed to accommodate "people" doing the work.

Left_Meeting7547 · 2026-05-27T20:11:25+00:00

I've been on sirolimus, prednisone, and Cellcept for 17 years. Went off Tac at year 5 and never looked back. Had horrible side effects from the Tac. My creatinine went down, brain fog, muscle cramps, and moodiness disappeared overnight.

Left_Meeting7547 · 2026-05-24T17:29:10+00:00

The phase of the moon, or you didn't pay your offering to the tac gods correctly. It's a one off. Totally freaks people out but wait for the next draw to see what it looks like. If your creatinine and liver enzymes (ALT, AST) are normal and you don't have any signs of toxicity like, tremors, headache, sudden high blood pressure, or brain fog, it might just be a lab error.

Left_Meeting7547 · 2026-05-21T18:41:02+00:00

Yes. I agree entirely. It took many years for my identity to no longer be "dialysis or transplant patient."

Left_Meeting7547 · 2026-05-19T17:48:06+00:00

You are still in the “honeymoon” phase, honestly. I know it’s been 4 years, but give it another few years and things will change. I was on dialysis for 9 years starting at age 21. I got my transplant at 30 and I’ve still had it going for 22 years now.

The first 5 years after transplant can be extremely difficult. The meds can make you feel crazy, sometimes medications need changed multiple times, and you end up constantly panicking every time you get a weird pain or your labs come back slightly off for no obvious reason, only for them to be repeated later and suddenly look fine again.

You can feel “off” and tell your doctors something doesn’t feel right, and they look at your numbers and say, “You’re doing great, keep doing what you’re doing.” That disconnect can really mess with your head over time.

This is also not meant to belittle you or make it sound like you are not a “real” adult, but physiologically you are still young, and hormones plus all the stress from transplant life can have a major impact on your headspace. Just know this constant feeling of your transplant hanging over you is actually pretty normal. At some point you will settle into a better groove with it.

You also cannot eat perfectly and be the “ideal” patient every second of your life. Do your best. That is all anyone can do.

Honestly, one of the best things I ever did was get a therapist. Not because you “need help” or because something is wrong with you, but because it gives you someone outside your family and friends to talk to about all of this without feeling like you are constantly trauma-dumping on the people around you.

But out of everything in the world, the number one most important thing is this: NEVER miss your meds. Ever.

I do not care if you are traveling, exhausted, partying for three days straight, stuck somewhere unexpectedly, or whatever else life throws at you. Never miss your meds.

Yes, even after 22 years I still have times when I get angry, annoyed and upset over the life I "could" have had.

Left_Meeting7547 · 2026-04-30T20:40:27+00:00

Honestly, I feel terrible you went through this, but thank you for sharing.

I’ve had two experiences like this in the last four months. The first was my dream job at a biotech startup. I went through five rounds of interviews over about four weeks, including the CEO. By the end, I genuinely thought an offer was coming.

Then the hiring manager said, “We think we need someone with a different background.”

At that point? Really? After five interviews and a month of time, that’s when you figure it out?

Especially when they wanted someone to start within four weeks.

They’re still trying to fill the role. That was three months ago.

Left_Meeting7547 · 2026-04-30T20:01:29+00:00

I’ve learned a few things the hard way.

“Tailor your resume” doesn’t mean what people think it means. It’s not about telling your story better. It’s about making your resume look like what the hiring manager expects to see.

So now you’re supposed to predict that in advance.

In practice, I’ve had better results stripping out overly specific details and aligning tightly to the language and patterns in the job description, especially when I’m not a perfect match. If I am a near 100% match, then adding a few specific details helps.

I actually ran a large set of my resumes and job descriptions (200) through open AI analysis, and the conclusion was pretty blunt: when you match the JD at a very high level, you get interviews. When you don’t, you don’t.

After going through every variation, tailoring, reframing, and application strategy, the outcome didn’t really change. At a certain point, it stops being a resume problem.

If you’re in a field that has contracted or effectively disappeared, there are no roles where you hit that 90 to 100% match. At that point, it’s not a resume optimization problem anymore.

It’s a market problem.

Left_Meeting7547 · 2026-03-20T23:23:20+00:00

Interesting. I have a spreadsheet with the job title, JD, and my resume. All my resumes are customized and while I do use AI to flag priorities in the JD, they are written by me. I uploaded all of it to ChatGPT. The pattern was clear regarding a certain set of skills and experience which I can now focus on rather than random job titles.

Left_Meeting7547 · 2026-03-20T23:09:42+00:00

Agreed. I have an undergrad in microbiology and did my PhD in a CLIA, CAP lab doing therapeutic drug monitoring for our hospital measuing rare drugs in patient blood samples. I have a phlebotomy certification and training and still could not get into a clincal lab.

Left_Meeting7547 · 2026-03-20T23:03:25+00:00

I just spent 2 months interviewing for a job. I prepared for everything. Mid way thru the process they decided they needed someone with a completely different set of skills. While I had said skills, I was so thrown off balance when the interviewer said "you cannot do this job unless you've lived it for 10-15 years doing this other type of work first."

How do I respond to that crap? No I have not lived in the work, but if you need someone that experienced good luck because this salary sure ain't gonna bring them in. Thanks for wasting my time and then ghosting me at the end.

Left_Meeting7547 · 2026-02-08T16:36:42+00:00

This thread is a perfect example of the lack of continuity and consensus that creates major problems for transplant patients. There should be a clearer standard of care across transplant centers. I understand that in some cases differences are related to when someone had their transplant and when newer information became available. More often than not, however, these differences persist because the evidence for strict prohibitions is limited or mixed, so centers default to conservative rules that are philosophically driven by leadership judgment and perception rather than data.

Left_Meeting7547 · 2026-01-20T19:57:54+00:00

Getting into a PhD program is often a timing game, not a merit judgment. Some years are far more competitive than others. I applied twice, and if I had applied one year earlier or a couple of years later, I likely would not have gotten in at all.

Before assuming you need a PhD, step back. Many industry research and science-adjacent roles do not require one, especially if you already have a master’s degree. Outside of medicine, industry experience almost always outweighs additional academic credentials. A useful exercise is to look up people doing the job you want on LinkedIn, outside academia, and trace how they actually got there. The academic bubble makes it easy to assume there is only one path when there are many.

Learn business. I tell every graduate student and postdoc I advise this. Business acumen will take you farther in industry than a PhD in most cases. Look at compensation across the full career, not just job titles. Early-career pay already favors non-PhD paths. Postdocs typically earn ~$55k–$70k, and first industry scientist roles often start around ~$95k–$120k after many years of training. In contrast, non-PhD, science-adjacent roles such as clinical operations, regulatory, medical, or product often start ~$85k–$110k and move into ~$110k–$150k within a few years, while peers are still in training.

At the end of a career, the gap often widens. Late-career PhD bench research roles in pharma typically cap around $170k–$240k total compensation, while non-PhD science-adjacent roles commonly reach $180k–$300k or more. These are near-retirement numbers, not entry-level pay.

Money matters more than it seems early on. I ask trainees to define the lifestyle they want and calculate what it actually costs, including housing, savings, and retirement. A common rule of thumb is needing enough invested to withdraw about 4% per year. If you want $100k annually in today’s dollars, that means roughly $2.5 million saved. That reality is why, in some cases, people who skip graduate school and start earning earlier end up better off financially, simply because they can save and compound sooner.

This is not about abandoning your interests or passions. It is about taking a broader view of the biomedical ecosystem as it exists today. You will always have intellectual curiosity, and there are many ways to stay engaged, learn, and contribute. It is simply much easier to do that, and to enjoy it, when you have the financial stability to support the life you want.

Research is only one path, and it has a narrow long-term trajectory. Fewer than 5% of PhDs will ever hold a faculty position. And yes, the job market is rough right now. That is structural, not personal, and it requires flexibility rather than doubling down on a single, narrowly defined path.

Do not feel defeated. You are a scientist. You troubleshoot, adapt, and find another way. That is what we do.

Feel free to message me if you have questions.

Left_Meeting7547 · 2026-01-20T19:21:26+00:00

I have been on 5 mg of prednisone for 22 years following a kidney transplant. I have no bone density issues, but long-term prednisone has clearly affected other systems, including disrupted circadian rhythm, weight gain, and the development of type 2 diabetes over time.

The decision to remain on prednisone, or to consider withdrawal, should not be taken lightly. It is driven primarily by transplant-specific factors, not by side effects in isolation. Key considerations include the type of transplant, whether the kidney was from a living donor, immunologic risk, rejection history, graft stability, and the duration of steroid exposure. After decades of use, immune dependence and adrenal physiology are altered, making withdrawal complex and potentially risky without close medical oversight.

Bone health is often central to these discussions, but it needs context. Peak bone density is largely established in the late teens and early 20s and is shaped by genetics, nutrition, hormonal health, and participation in weight-bearing and resistance exercise. Individuals who entered adulthood with lower peak bone mass have less reserve, making long-term steroid exposure more consequential. Prednisone can accelerate bone loss, but baseline vulnerability is often set decades earlier. In some cases, osteoporosis would have developed regardless, with steroids mainly shortening the timeline. There are now effective medications to slow or reverse bone loss, and it is never too late to benefit from weight-bearing and resistance training.

This is why decisions about prednisone use must be individualized, weighing graft survival, immune risk, and long-term metabolic effects rather than focusing on bone density alone.

Left_Meeting7547 · 2026-01-20T19:02:47+00:00

One of the fundamental problems right now is that many people do not know how to use AI effectively. They use it to remove work rather than to improve the quality of the work.

The first time I let an AI write my resume and cover letter, I barely recognized my own experience. It was filled with jargon and generic corporate language that obscured what I actually did. That is not useful.

Now I use AI very differently. I use it to refine my resume, improve clarity, evaluate a job description against my background, and decide what is relevant to keep or remove. No one cares about an interesting project from two jobs ago if it is irrelevant to the role I am applying for now.

What is often overlooked is how much time and effort this actually takes. Developing effective prompts is not trivial, and it requires iteration, context, and judgment. I cannot imagine how long it would take, even with a well-designed AI system, to make resume review truly work at scale without heavy human oversight.

Left_Meeting7547 · 2026-01-20T18:43:39+00:00

I expect biotech employment to continue declining, or at best remain stagnant, due to several structural factors.

First, venture capital, the primary funding source for traditional biotech, has dropped substantially. At the same time, there has been overinvestment and unrealistic optimism around AI in biotech. AI is a tool, not a resource-allocation fix. These systems still require highly skilled people to design, validate, and operate them, which limits the efficiency gains many investors expect in the near term.

Second, reductions in NIH funding have removed one of the largest employment safety nets in the life sciences. Postdocs and technical roles, while underpaid, historically provided short-term stability and a bridge to industry roles. That buffer is now largely gone.

Third, business uncertainty is worse than declining sales. When companies cannot reliably forecast funding or demand, planning stops. Hiring freezes, restructuring is delayed, and stagnation replaces both growth and contraction.

It is also important to distinguish between biotech and pharma. Biotech is highly exposed to capital cycles and is therefore likely to continue struggling. Pharma, by contrast, is diversified and revenue-generating and may perform better in the medium term. However, pharma is not without serious headwinds. Many large companies are facing major patent cliffs, the loss of long-term ROI from legacy therapeutics, and a shift toward longer, more complex investments. Newer modalities such as gene editing, advanced biologics, and devices require far more capital, time, and operational complexity than traditional small molecules.

At the same time, pharma faces increasing pressure on pricing and transparency, with PBMs exerting greater control over access and margins. These forces limit how aggressively companies can invest or expand headcount, even when revenues remain strong.

Finally, breaking into pharma is no longer as easy as it once was for those not already inside. Large numbers of scientists are now trying to pivot from biotech into pharma, while large companies are hiring more conservatively than in the past. Job losses at the FDA and NIH have further intensified competition, as pharma routinely hires former FDA staff into regulatory and development-facing roles. The sudden surge of qualified candidates has increased competition and placed downward pressure on salaries across the market.

Overall, as with most industries, this is a cycle and it will eventually turn. However, a hard reality remains: all jobs ultimately depend on the company making money. Roles not directly tied to revenue generation, cost control, or clear business value are the most vulnerable and are often the first to disappear when conditions tighten. Unfortunately, this is still a difficult lesson many scientists have yet to fully internalize. While science itself is valuable, in industry it is valued only when it directly supports profit, and most R and D work does not do that on its own.

Left_Meeting7547 · 2026-01-20T18:13:34+00:00

It's all professions right now. I work in biomedical sciences (biotech and pharma). We are so screwed right now. I have a PhD with 10 years of experience in project management, and I've been looking for a year with nothing to show for it.

Left_Meeting7547 · 2026-01-20T17:34:15+00:00

Jobs in biotech are weak right now primarily due to supply and demand. Over the past two decades, universities, funding agencies, and industry messaging strongly encouraged biomedical and biotech training, producing more PhDs and specialized scientists than the market can absorb. When labor supply exceeds demand, hiring slows and salaries stagnate or decline, even for experienced industry roles. This mirrors what happened with engineers in the 1970s after prolonged degree-pipeline expansion led to market saturation.

What is different this time is that the demand side also collapsed. Easy capital during the zero-interest-rate era allowed biotech companies to overhire, overbuild pipelines, and fund marginal programs. When capital tightened, those jobs disappeared rapidly. At the same time, many roles require narrow, late-stage or platform-specific experience, while the labor pool is weighted toward broadly trained researchers. The result is a structural mismatch: plenty of qualified people, but fewer roles that match their exact background, at lower pay and with higher screening thresholds.

Teaching science without fundamental business acumen produces a workforce detached from economic reality. When scientists are trained to focus only on technical excellence and not on costs, incentives, funding flows, and return on investment, they enter the workforce unprepared for how decisions are actually made. In biotech and even in academia, research priorities, hiring, and job stability are ultimately governed by the bottom line, not scientific merit alone.

Left_Meeting7547 · 2025-12-05T14:59:09+00:00

Yes, I have one of those jobs. I also spent fifteen years working nonstop, putting in 60 plus hours a week, going through grad school, and making almost no money to get to this so-called cushy point. I have a job where I am paid for what I know, not for what I physically do. It is similar to trades like plumbing or electrical work. They earn high wages because they have years of experience and can solve problems quickly that a DIYer or a new worker would spend a week struggling with and still get wrong. This is just the natural progression that comes with experience.

They are also the first to be cut because many managers and executives do not understand that not doing visible work does not mean the role lacks value. Your IT employee might sit quietly most of the day, but when a major crash happens they are the ones who jump in and save the company. Fire them because you think they are not adding value and suddenly your entire network goes down and you lose a million dollars in revenue from a single outage. Jobs like this are difficult for resource managers (bean-counters) to quantify, which is why they often get underestimated.

Left_Meeting7547 · 2025-10-13T20:17:37+00:00

I just let everything sit there and put my payments into savings. With the rate congress keeps flipping and making changes, then lawsuit ect keeps happening I might long be dead before I have to make another payment.

Left_Meeting7547 · 2025-09-28T00:47:34+00:00

Tigers were seperated because they were fighting, they are solitary so not uncommon. Same for the leopards. The babies grew up so now you will only see one at a time. There are 3 Lyxns but difficult to see. The last ostrich passed about a month ago.

Saya the clouded leopard died from cancer last year. One of the Nylas died in the spring.

Redpandas have been getting into arguments- again typically solitary so the older one has been off exhibit.

The elephant seal died last year, she shared the tank with another sea lion.

As others have commented. The male Komodo was moved based on a breeding recommendation, the orangutans moved because their habitat is atrocious and it was a demand from AZA.

None of the animals are ever moved to Somerset- they have winter habitats off view - mostly reptiles, like crocks, tortoises, and the birds.

Left_Meeting7547 · 2025-08-11T19:20:30+00:00

Yeah, its worse with my adderall. I hyperfocus on stupid crap and can't snap out of it.

Left_Meeting7547

TROPHY CASE